Art and Competition

Our most recent Twitter post hinted at a rich discussion concerning the impact competition has on the creative process that we felt deserved further investigation.

Inherent in the complexities of this topic is the inescapable ambiguities surrounding the purpose of art.  Before any formal theory of art was introduced, typically beginning with Plato, items we may now consider art functioned as religious or cultural objects.  This could be the worship of a deity, a symbolic item signifying a tribe, or an object imbued with mystical medicinal purposes.  Art has experienced a colossal shift from this "art in context/culture" to "art in, of, and for itself" (formalism), and with that an explosion of reasons for its modern purpose.

For reasons of our exploration, we will consider the impact competition has on expression, one of many accepted purposes of art.  These two forces -- competition and expression -- contrast similarly with the difference between pre-historic and modern art.  The objective in pre-historic art and in competition is above and outside of the objects themselves.  The significance of an African idol and a basketball exist outside the objects themselves, namely a deity and a game's objectives.  Modern art and expression, however, find more of their value in the object and art themselves.  The value of a Van Gogh resides predominantly in the piece itself, not a cultural setting or act.  The value of personal expression comes predominantly from the person themselves, not external standards or criteria.

How does the introduction of external standards or criteria -- other competitors and panels of judges -- influence expression?  In other words, how does the introduction of a pre-defined purpose for art influence the artist's realization of the piece's own purpose?  Expression is inescapably altered, for better or for worse.  The personal preferences of judges and relative skills of one's competitors influence how a pianist might play, a singer might sing, or a dancer might dance.  Artists are free to ignore these pressures during competitive performance, but these pressures form the essence of competition itself.

These pressures can lead to both positive and negative returns for growing artists.  They can provide world-class advice, direction, and guidance from judges with a wealth of experience or their fellow competitors.  They can help build the concentration, confidence, and presence required of modern stage performers.  But one's own expression can also be considered an effective social tool rather than an enriching personal and social experience.

Artists are constantly presented with the challenge to balance two different forces in the artistic process:  the drive to express, and the drive to compete.  While they both satisfy different purposes, and therefore have their own merit, we can agree that modern art faces a unique dilemma that other competitive activities don't:  that so much of the glory of art comes not from external, objective sources from but from the unending flow of internal, creative human potential.

Red Bellow.  The world's a stage.